Is it bizarre to question the Monarchy's Budget?

www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/topic/lynemouth/

I see now that it is in the paragraph before the "rumour".

There are no other online reports about this. A bit more info would be useful.

Read the article again, Elegran.
The eight remaining farmworkers have been made redundant, is what I read.

She makes some good points Lilygran

I like Victoria Coren Mitchell and I think this is an entertaining point of view. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/02/royal-family-should-act-like-royals

The redundancy story sounds like rumour. They have not yet announced what is to happen. www.thejournal.co.uk/news/north-east-news/buyer-urged-spell-out-plans-6755432

Once upon a time, a victorious incomer who thought he had a right could take actual possession of the country from the previous king/queen and really own it. He/she would receive taxes from the inhabitants and use the money to pay for the admin of the realm, and the cost of wars.

Those who had helped to wrest the kingdom from the previous monarch were given chunks of land as a reward. William the Bastard used this system to advantage, and planted his Norman followers all over the country. What was left belonged to the King/Queen and was the Crown Estate.

While Monarchs spoke English and knew their country, this system worked (mostly) Then the Stuarts overspent and when the Hanoverians took over, there was precious little in the state coffers, they didn't speak the language all that well, and were not keen on all the hassle of raisIng more cash.

"1760 George III surrendered the revenue of the Crown Estate to HM Treasury as part of an exchange which relieved the monarch of all responsibility for:

the cost of the civil government
the national debt accrued by previous monarchs, and
his own personal debt.

In return, he received an annual grant known as the Civil List. By tradition, each subsequent monarch has agreed to this formality as part of the ritual of his or her accession. However, from 1 April 2012, under the terms of the Sovereign Grant Act 2011 (SSG), the Civil List was abolished, and in the future each monarch will receive from the Treasury a stipulated percentage of the Crown Estate's annual net revenue (currently set at 15%). This does not infer any legal right to the revenue of the Crown Estate itself on the reigning monarch, or change the nature of its ownership: it is simply a benchmark by which the SSG is set as a grant by Parliament." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate

But why make the farmers redundant if they are going to carry on farming? And who made them redundant, the government?
The farmers do not think they were very supportive at local level.
Doesn't make sense, that, anyway. It is not the private property of the Queen but she is the legal owner. What does that mean?
Who paid for it? Who gets the rent? Who pays the taxes?

Forgot to blue it (as usual) www.thecrownestate.co.uk

Quote from http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/ "We are governed by an Act of Parliament. The property we manage is owned by the Crown, but is not the private property of HM the Queen. We work supportively with government; in Westminster, in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and at a local level.

Our property portfolio covers urban and rural areas, around half of the foreshore and almost all of the seabed around the UK. Our net surplus (profit) goes to the Treasury for the benefit of the nation."

"The Queen is the legal owner but does not have any [powers of management or control"

The crown estates have just bought Rio Tinto Alcan at Lynemouth for £20 million. It has a windfarm as well as other farms. The farmers have been made redundant, even though they say they are going to keep it agricultural.

As I said before, we need a Head of State and as such she is good value for money compared to others, jcdoh!

hi to you all, my comment would be would you if you were in her shoes ??
be prepared to give away items given or brought by past family members -- just give them to us -the people-- who up and throw out perfectly good items !
because they are out of fashion ?

if it wasn't for folk like her --we would not have these beautiful places to visit, age old things crafted by hands hundreds of years ago,
I am far from well off! but I don't for one minute resent her wealth nor the money she earns doing her job--queen of uk; she is some-one we can look up to knowing she does it for us;
where as the folk in general want more and more , even though much of it is wasted; I have done my share of making bad and wasteful mistakes.

I was speaking of her treasures Merlotgran not the crown jewels, in her safe keeping? they certainly are and keep them she will

No Ana I do not think that

It's perfectly reasonable to ask questions about how public funds are being spent by anyone. How the Queen spends her personal fortune is a matter for her. Some of the posts above seem to suggest that she should be subsidising the state - which she does anyway, I believe.

At least the 'treasures' are in her safe keeping and not being flogged off to America.

So, you think she should give away all her worldly possessions and go into an old folks' home, Annie?

What has envy to do with questioning the cost of a monarch, as for envy of her personal wealth, I for one am not envious , I do question how as a Christian she can give her annual Christmas speech speaking of the message of the Christ Child yet store up treasures on earth.

Questioning the sovereign's budget, pointing out how privileged a life he/she and his/her family lead regardless of ability, commitment or usefulness, or suggesting that the such a hereditary role is anachronistic in the twenty-first century are not indications of envy but sheer common sense.

Just a thought about the wind turbines in their back yard - as PC is so into green environmental issues.

The Queen, Elizabeth Windsor, and the sovereign- happens to be Elizabeth Windsor, has been at different times Henry Vll, Victoria, Edward 1, ll, lll, lV etc are the same personage but not the same person. E Windsor is admittedly personally rich as are many people in the UK. Elizabeth R receives funds from the nation to support the expenses of her office. So would any Head of State, Prime Minister, Lord Mayor. Be envious of E Windsor if you wish, although envy is a destructive emotion best avoided, but it is utterly pointless to be envious of the sovereign.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-to-rake-in-38-million-a-year-256230

Thank you, I was told the other day but .....

It should be two square brackets at either end, Margaret.

Or you could just tick the 'Convert links automatically' option below this box!

it didn't do it again ....
[www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/queen-to-rake-in-38-million-a-year-256230]